Well, if they had been huge sellers we would have gotten new novels immediately…
2 Likes
This is exactly the point. Horrowitz books’ have a limited appeal and nostalgia isn’t what it used to be, the Fleming timeline is not as appealing as it would have been in the 90s.
The novels, if they continue as essentially, fan fiction will continue to have a sharper diminishing of returns.
The character can continue, perhaps utilizing the fantastical elements of Fleming or exploring 007 in depth. We are now almost sixty years away from the original and like Dracula and Holmes Bond has taken on a life of its own. There are so many stories to tell
2 Likes
Personally, prefer them spaced apart a bit; makes them a bit more special when they do come. Can fully appreciate the arguments that more modern-day settings may generally appeal wider, as “Bond” in the public mindset is up-to-the-minute gadgets and ahead of its time rather than of its vintage, although that has been tried before to (let’s say) “mixed” effect. The problem with the “in period” ones is a tendency to be slightly arch and ironic - Faulks, Boyd and Horowitz all fall into this trap, to a greater or lesser extent. It’s not an easy call by any stretch of the imagination, and I think “incompetent” is a smidge harsh. The money keeps rolling in, regardless.
5 Likes
I would love to read the adventures of CraigBond between QOS and SF.
3 Likes
I would love to have seen at least two of those adventures on the big screen.
My ideal Craig era would’ve looked something like this:
CR
QoS
Bond 23
Bond 24
SF
SP
NTTD
Around the time of QoS, MGW was asked how long he anticipates Craig will stay in the role, to which he answered that he’d love it if Craig beat Moore’s record of seven films. The funny part is, Craig has definitely been around long enough to achieve that…
He has played the role 7 times…technically
1 Like
Broberhauser / Brofeld would claim credit for the ills suffered by CraigBond in any intermediate adventures too, which is all the more reason not to subject us to them. That would be a massive encyclopaedia of pain, for all of us.
3 Likes
At least he wouldn’t do it with photocopied photos.
3 Likes
Many of us are old enough to have endured* the good old days of Gardner and Benson when we got a new Bond adventure every year. Weren’t these the halcyon days for us fans? Sadly, no. The books kept coming. And we bought them and read them and at times we even convinced ourselves we liked them.
But the truth of it was that they increasingly felt like a chore in the Gardner days - and like computer game merchandise after Benson took over. It was by no means all bad; some of it was hilarious in its own right. But what it was most of all was a yearly reminder that Fleming’s days were long gone.
Yes, Horowitz now keeps coming back to the topic - but don’t for a second imagine he’d be up for it every year, or even just every other year. He’d be willing to deliver a little treat for fans, something that may also sell reasonably well outside the hardcore fandom. In general though the demand for new Bond novels isn’t regarded as overwhelming. Having one every year or two would in all likelihood not change anything about this.
As fans we would of course like to see more Bond adventures, especially when they are well written. For the Eon/IFP side though a new continuation is only a sideshow of a sideshow. At best it’s well received with fans and perhaps the odd critic. But it also demands a fee for the author, a publisher contract, perhaps some moderate marketing. And to what end? Keep a fraction of the fanbase happy - or not - and maybe inspire somebody called ‘Piers Morgan’ to a favourable tweet you’d rather prefer to ignore (the tweet and the person).
Whatever we think of it, this is the current ‘normal’ in the world of litBond, a rare return of an old friend we haven’t seen for some time.
*I wanted to write ‘enjoyed’ but somehow Freud typed something else for me instead…
8 Likes
My head canon for the Craig era is:
Casino Royale
Quantum of Solace
Blood Stone
Goldeneye: Reloaded
Carte Blanche
Skyfall
Spectre
No Time To Die
Carte Blanche doesn’t need much tweaking to fit in the Craig era, especially pre-Skyfall.
I must confess: the only continuation novel I liked and considered worthy of Fleming was COLONEL SUN.
6 Likes
Amis had several advantages: he admired Fleming, was a contemporary and in some ways a kindred spirit. Most of all: not only did he love the books, he instinctively understood them* and enjoyed them all the more for it.
The one thing Amis didn’t share with Fleming was the constant daydreaming. He later acknowledged that writing Colonel Sun had been more difficult than expected and up to a point we can see why.
The initial idea is practically identical to the Modesty Blaise strip Top Traitor (picked up some years later in the novel The Silver Mistress). But Amis version, while surely unusual for a Bond adventure, still ends up less bizarre than the MB strip and book. And lacks some crucial logic too.
And yet, in spite of being written by a literary highbrow fan of Bond, it’s still one of the better continuations and in fact a favourite with many fans.
Whatever we may think of Horowitz’ efforts - going there over 50 years later, in the hope to capture a shard of the original spirit, is a courageous endeavour. And mainly done for us fans, let’s not forget this.
*Not a given even with intelligent critics. While Amis was easily able to point out what made the Bonds tick, he entirely failed to muster the same understanding with regard to Deighton and leCarré.
5 Likes
I find Trigger Mortis and Forever and a Day to be good stories regardless of the period in which they’re set. And they could probably be translated into the modern day without many alterations.
This is where Project 007 can take full advantage. Set in the modern day, lots of gadgets, new cars, contemporary politics, etc. If the game is successful there’s a better chance of regular release schedules in comparison to the books, even if it’s 2 year + waits.
I happily consider it canon, and the same goes for Horowitz’s two. I’m less bothered by the rest. If there’s a third Horowitz book I do hope it’s set before OHMSS, because the ‘Bond at the end of his rope’ angle is tiresome to me. Bond spent 12 months searching for Blofeld, which is plenty of time for a side-adventure to have happened. And it’s Bond still in his prime, before his world was turned upside down.
But I admit right at the end of the timeline would be nice symmetry, considering he’s already done a prequel to CR. I’m sure he’d find a way to make it more interesting than DMC and Solo.
2 Likes
My head cannon for the Fleming timeline includes all of 50s/60s set adventures including the continuation novels (with the exception of John Pearson’s weird one). On recent rereads, I found myself enjoying both DMC and Solo, much more. Sure they aren’t the best (DMC is a play-it-safe, greatest hits novel and Solo is kind of slow), but they each mostly succeed with what they try to do. Especially Solo, which does something very different to the rest of the novel canon.
Good to see this thread is still running, nearly three years on!
I’m glad to learn that Horowitz is at least interested in coming back for a third book, and that he wants to set it towards the end of the timeline. As has been discussed earlier in the thread, there’s a great symmetry to it - he’s given us an origin story, and a book that’s pretty much dead centre in the Fleming timeline. So something at the end makes sense.
It does beg the question though - if Horowitz does do a post-TMWTGG story, will he do what Faulks and Boyd didn’t and give Fleming’s Bond an ‘ending’? No Time to Die is widely believed to be an ending to the story of Craig’s Bond, so the idea of giving Bond a ‘final story’ will possibly not be such a wild idea by the time Horowitz starts work on his book.
I honestly thought that Solo would be an ending, especially since the book starts with Bond turning 45 (i.e. the age at which 00’s must mandatorily retire), and Boyd claimed in interviews that his story is ‘‘one last game for the old sharpshooter’’ or something along those lines. But ultimately, the book turned out to be just another Bond adventure (a decent enough one, but nowhere near as Fleming-esq as Horowitz’s or even Faulks’ efforts).
I dunno…I can understand the appeal of wanting to keep Bond as an eternal character who’s story ‘‘never ends’’. Notionally, I suppose the franchise is meant to be an open-ended series of never-ending missions with loose continuity at best. But given that we live in an era where casual audiences and readers are a lot more literate about stuff like multiple timelines/continuities, and given that Horowitz already gave Bond an origin story, why can’t we have an ending as well?
Just a thought…I’m not fanatical about the idea, and I’d be perfectly happy if he gave us just another post-TMWTGG story, as long as its well written. But I just think Horowitz has an opportunity here too good to pass…
3 Likes
Solo is weird in that, it’s a very different story for the literary Bond. But, it doesn’t really have a true ending. Kobus Breed just gets away with it. It’s quite possible that Boyd was setting up a sequel that due to the friction between him and IFP during development was probably never on the cards. It definitely seemed like it would be an ‘ending’ of sorts, but that didn’t really pan out.
I haven’t heard. Could you elaborate?
Is ‘closure’ (of a kind) a thing we would appreciate?
I suppose Fleming himself tried to give Bond closure with From Russia With Love’s ending and then again with You Only Live Twice‘s. Both times the demand for more Bond made Fleming come back to write more. In a way even the last lines of his last two novels, borderline philosophical pondering about sparrows’ tears and the ‘same view that would always pall’, was a way to say ‘This is it, gentle readers.’
Fleming wasn’t the first to try and find a way of putting a big full stop under a character - nor would he be the last. Sherlock Holmes went over the Reichenbach Falls, only to reappear a few years later. And Agatha Christie would kill off Hercule Poirot but keep that last adventure under wraps until it was clear she wouldn’t write any more.
But the crucial thing here is, the trope of the ‘last adventure’, that one last big mission or however we want to call it…it’s not really awfully popular with fans. Of course there are also exceptions, examples where this particular theme gains a certain import due to its execution, and perhaps also its point in time, see LOGAN or TRUE GRIT. But I’m not sure they are really necessary as something fans in the wider sense would need.
I’ve often heard how Brosnan deserved his last big adventure - but after CASINO ROYALE and the subsequent years these calls became less and less frequent, and over time most people apparently came to the conclusion that Brosnan had had his last big adventure with DIE ANOTHER DAY.
Is Craig’s case different? Yes and no. There is that inner continuity in his films that would allow more of a definite ending for his tenure. But would the world be much different if SPECTRE had been Craig’s last film? Hardly, Eon could have just moved on and a new face in the role could have built a new continuity - or carried on from Craig’s. Seeing his Bond now return after more or less quiet years in retirement is new for the Bond series. But as a spy thriller element it’s used in hundreds of films and books already. As for the closure NO TIME TO DIE will provide, we’ll just have to see.
Interestingly, Kingsley Amis once pitched an idea for a Bond in his 70s being approached by the daughter of a US senator (or admiral or general, I forget which). Bond was supposed to investigate and disappear with the villain (Russian?) in a waterfall. When (then) Glidrose heard about it they told him to never write something like this.
A shame, I would probably have enjoyed it. But then you don’t hear many fans rave about Poirot’s last case or Modesty Blaise’s Cobra Trap. They are nice to have, but I for one wouldn’t need to know about the ultimate fate of these characters and maybe a kind of ambiguity is the best way to treat these matters. In his last Dark Tower book (before he wrote The Wind Through the Keyhole) King ended his tale by his hero going through a door. There is something behind the door, but as I remember it King urged his readers to keep on this side of the door.
Wise counsel.
4 Likes
In a word, No.
The trouble with that kind of closure in these days is that the term ‘reboot’ is now too widely used for anyone to ever truly consider a ‘closure’ as anything but a gimmick.
In the days of authorial control over Holmes, Poirot and Bond, the guiding forces might have been able to bring something ‘Closing’ about. But not when the property has a stronger presence and pecuniary needs in the Studio spaces. Again, one will see if, upon the release of NTTD, a) there is a closure of sorts and b) whether there is poetry in its conception.
Unfortunately, the marketing structures surrounding the return of Q and Moneypenny in Skyfall, and Blofeld in SPECTRE would tend to suggest this type of idea as being quite redundant.
2 Likes
Obviously. Bond will return and we don’t even need to read it in the credits to know it.